Wayne Bennett’s scarlet defacto bride (above), and surfer Layne Beachley (below)
So the once-Saintly Knight and Horseman – and one time Father of the Year – has walked out on his missus and disabled kids in favour of a blonde with fake tits who looks like an aged Layne Beachley, although the comparisons end there, for the champion surfer doesn’t have bolt ons, is happily married, and isn’t a homewrecker, unlike Benny ‘Faded’ Superstar’s new bird.
It’s a dog act it is, what Bennett’s gone and done, and such a gross violation of the Geebung Code that the minute the news broke Kevvy ripped down all the Broncos flags in the Zillman Waterholes bar at the bunger and before you could say Michael Morgan the old fella had replaced them with fluttering pieces of Cowboys cloth.
“What would you bloody expect from a bloke who bashed our brown Bunger brothers!” Kevvy ranted as he tore down the Broncos gear.”Leopards and Zillmere boys never change their spots, and you can never trust a bloody copper, even if he once was a damn good footy coach. And besides, he’s a bloody teetotaller!”
That of course was the end of the matter, even for the staunchest of Broncos supporters at the Bunger, and Bennett will never again darken the door of the greatest RSL in the greatest city in the greatest state in the greatest nation in all the world, even if he is raising money for charity, because it begins at home and Wayne has just destroyed his.
That’s that then, and if you start making excuses for the cuckolded coach’s behavior then you’re a wanker or wankess, but hey what about the bloody mainstream media turning Benny’s sheila into a glamour hey? I’ve seen better heads on the Sprog’s pimples, and just like my dear old Granny always said, no amount of breast augmentation surgery (the crude old bugger called them tit lifts) can turn a sow’s purse into a silk ear, can they sportsfans?
What about his missus hey? You know, the wife of 40 years and mother of his kids? How the f*ck do ya reckon she feels as the mainstream donkeys go ga-ga over a hitherto anonymous piece of worn leather with bolt ons? Not too f*cking good I reckon.
Bennett’s reputation these days is akin to his marriage and his footy coaching career, or will be anyway after the word about Kevvy’ ban gets around.
Just like the Broncos and the Blonde.
Don’t you worry about that.
The learned sentencing judge had before him a report dated 10 June 1997 from Dr Donald A Grant a psychiatrist, described as “Clinical Associate Professor in Psychiatry”. This report had been obtained by the respondent’s solicitor.
On 6 June 1997 Dr Grant had interviewed the respondent at the Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre and when he prepared his report he had notes which he had made in conversations with the respondent, as well as a statement from the respondent’s father, a statement from the respondent’s mother and a brief of evidence from the Queensland Police Department including statements of complainants, witnesses and police as well as a record of interview between the police and the respondent.
Dr Grant said the respondent was “clearly fully aware of the scope and number of offences”. The respondent detailed to Dr Grant the first rape – that committed in Bundaberg – and as the report shows, told Dr Grant that:-
“He felt scared and at the same time stimulated in a strange way by the assault. Once it started and the woman did what he said, he said he calmed down and it was easier”.
Dr Grant noted that “subsequent offences took a fairly similar course”. He recorded that in between assaults the respondent hid the knife in a toilet between the wall and the ceiling where he knew his (the respondent’s) girlfriend could not reach. Dr Grant recorded the respondent told him “that although he was obviously sexually aroused during the assaults he said it was not really a pleasant kind of arousal. It was more a stimulation and a feeling of fear”. I should add that Dr Grant, when speaking of the first offence at Bundaberg, recorded:-
“He denies planning this event in any degree, but when questioned indicated that he had thought about it for a few days beforehand. He said he had thought about going out and `looking at people’ (that is, voyeurism) and that his thoughts went from there and he started thinking about raping somebody. For about two days he had thought about how he would go about it and planned how he would approach the woman from behind and put his hand over her mouth etc.”
In the assessment portion of his report Dr Grant said (in a passage very largely quoted by the learned sentencing judge in his sentencing remarks):-
“Mr Burley’s history suggests some antisocial and narcissistic traits in his personality. At the time of the offences he was involved in rather complex relationship problems with two girlfriends who were rivals for his affections. He was also coping with the impending separation of his mother and sister who were moving to Germany. Mr Burley’s offences were clearly planned and tended to follow the same pattern. It is probable that the offences were motivated by suppressed rage at female figures in his life (mother and girlfriends) and that this rage was displaced onto his victims. Whilst unconscious mechanisms were no doubt involved in the motivations, the actual behaviour was well organised and deliberate.
The pattern of offending behaviour is very worrying in that it suggests sexual sadism with serial offending. The risk for future offending behaviour is therefore quite high unless some kind of intervention can be achieved which assists Mr Burley in understanding and overcoming these impulses. At present, Mr Burley’s understanding of his offences is very limited and although he is expressing an intellectual understanding that he needs to try to understand his behaviour the motivation for actually carrying this out may not be great. In any case therapy for such problems is very difficult and he would need much greater evaluation to assess whether he was capable of change.
From the information which I have there is no indication that Mr Burley was suffering from any psychiatric illness at the time of the offences and I do not believe there would be any grounds for a defence of unsoundness of mind. He is now likewise not suffering from any identifiable psychiatric illness and is fit to plead and fit for trial.”
Before I turn to the relevant facts I should say that before this Court, Mrs Clare who appears for the appellant, submits, as she did before the learned sentencing judge, that the head sentence should be in the range from 20 years to life imprisonment and in fact she has asked this Court to allow the appeal and impose a sentence of life imprisonment.
The learned sentencing judge had before him a schedule giving particulars of each of the twenty-seven charges appearing on the first indictment. His Honour also heard oral submissions detailing the changes. I propose to give some detail of the charges in respect of each of the four victims.
Victim No 1
This complainant was a 22 year old single English woman residing at a caravan park at Bundaberg. At about 5.30 a.m. on 28 October 1995 she went to a nearby toilet block. The respondent had followed her into the toilet block and used a knife to force her into two shower cubicles. He committed six offences upon this woman, being, deprivation of liberty, indecent assault, attempted rape, indecent assault with a circumstance of aggravation (forcing her to perform oral sex), indecent assault and attempted anal intercourse and rape.
Physical injuries suffered by this victim included bruising to the neck and chest, grazed lips, blood on the labia majora and grazes and lacerations to the vaginal entrance. The knife was used by the respondent throughout the sexual assault accompanied by threats to kill.
These events transformed this victim from a carefree young woman who had confidently travelled around the world to a person afraid to be alone and constantly battling irrational fears.
This complainant was a 22 year old typist on her way to work. As she approached the pedestrian overpass to the Gailes Railway Station at about 6.30 a.m. on 11 April 1996 the respondent grabbed her from behind. He dragged her at knife point towards bushes saying “slut, bitch, follow me” and “you better act as my girlfriend or I’ll slit your throat”; he pushed her towards a fence and then on to the ground as she resisted. She screamed for help and a man responded. The respondent fled.
The behaviour I have just set out constituted attempted rape. The respondent also committed the offence of grievous bodily harm. The complainant tried to get away from the respondent and grappled with him when he was holding the knife. He struck her with the knife on her hands and arms. She pushed the knife away from her throat with her hands. She suffered scarring and permanent tendon damage to her thumb – this has threatened her occupation as a typist. She has undergone two operations and physiotherapy is ongoing.
Victim No 3
This complainant was aged 18 years when at about 11.35 a.m. on 28 May 1996 she left a train at Ebbw Vale Railway Station to walk towards her home. She followed a concrete pedestrian path when the respondent ran from behind, seized her and covered her eyes with one hand and pressed a knife to the right side of her throat saying words to the effect “don’t scream or I’ll kill you”. He forced her from the path she was following and into a grassy area some 5 metres away. Over a period of some 40 minutes he committed the following offences:-
(a) three separate rapes;
(b) indecent assault with circumstance of aggravation (fellatio);
(c) indecent assault with circumstance of aggravation (anal intercourse or sodomy);
(d) indecent assault with circumstance of aggravation – digital penetration of the vagina;
(e) indecent assault with circumstance of aggravation – forcing the complainant on to her hands and knees and digitally penetrating her anus;
(f) two charges of indecent assault – one of undressing the victim and using her dress to blindfold her; then kissing both breasts and then pushing a knife against one breast and the other indecent assault being forcing the complainant to masturbate him;
(g) common assault – after deep tongue thrusting during vaginal rape – spat in her mouth and made her swallow his saliva;
(h) stealing – stealing $130-$135 from the complainant’s purse.
The respondent, while going through this complainant’s wallet, read out her name and address.
The physical injuries suffered by this complainant included a bite to the neck, superficial lacerations all over her body except her face, marks from the knife on her neck, throat and breast and redness and tenderness of the vagina and anus.
The evidence shows that at some stage the respondent wrote down this complainant’s telephone number and some months later the paper with her telephone number on it was still in his wallet.
Victim No 4
This victim was a 42 year old woman who was a university student and a mother of children. At about 11.45 a.m. on 25 June 1996 she alighted from a train at Ebbw Vale Railway Station and began to walk along a path beside the train line to catch a bus. She intended to cross an overhead bridge and when about 10 metres from the bottom of the stairs to that bridge, the respondent seized her from behind, placing his cupped hand hard against her nose and mouth and at the same time holding a knife against her neck.
She was forced at knife point to walk into an abandoned industrial shed not far from the railway station.
Apart from the knife, he continued to hold his hand over this victim’s mouth causing her to hyperventilate such that she believed she was going to faint. She tried to pull his hand away from her mouth in order to get a breath but he struck her several times across the face and ears and threatened to kill her. He tied her jumper around her head so that she could not see what was going on. This complainant’s ordeal at the hands of the respondent lasted about 40 minutes. During this time he committed the following offences:-
(a) three separate rapes while in the shed;
(b) assault with intent to rape – this occurred before she reached the shed;
(c) two offences of indecent assault each with a circumstance of aggravation (fellatio);
(d) indecent assault – she was forced to masturbate him using both hands;
(e) stealing – the respondent stole $80 from her bag during the time when this victim was being subjected to the above conduct.
The respondent said to her “Tell me where you live. If you lie I will check your driver’s licence and I’ll go and get your kids. You don’t know what I’m going to do to your kids. I would enjoy having sex with some little girls”. The victim believed what he said.
This victim’s physical injuries included three lacerations to her neck, cuts to the inner and outer arms and to her hands and wrists, scratches to her knees, at least 9 linear lacerations below her breast (caused by the knife) injury to an eye and cheek and tenderness and pain in the genital area.
When the respondent was eventually located he strenuously denied responsibility for any of the charges to which he ultimately pleaded guilty. The cases against him were overwhelming. In the case of each of the three rape victims he was identified by DNA evidence – the spermatozoa found in each victim was his.
In addition he had kept the telephone number of one of the victims. Two of the victims had been raped at or near railway stations frequented by the respondent. Gailes and Ebbw Vale are on the Brisbane – Ipswich rail line. In addition the respondent’s girlfriend had observed the respondent’s disappearance at the time when the last rape had occurred and his dishevelled and dirty appearance soon afterwards .
The respondent was born on 8 January 1978. He was 17½ years old at the time the first rape was committed and was 18 years old at the time when he attacked each of the other victims.
Can someone please tell me WTF is wrong with a plebiscite on same-sex marriage?
After centuries of persecution, and decades of fighting for equal rights, gay Australians now through a democratic process finally have a chance to be afforded equality. Those of us who believe in the inherent rights of human beings to enter freely into marriage – about 3/4 of us if you believe the polls – should be lining the streets waving flags in favor of what appears to be the most common-sense of plebiscites.
Yet Puffing Billy Shorten doth protest. That’s because he is a shallow, craven, cowardly, catholic-cuddling moron Archie doth say.
And so say all of us.
Or those of us who believe in human rights and who don’t carry ALP cards in their pockets anyway.
The evil rapist Burley. All that glitters is certainly not gold.
Troy Allan Burley is a grub.
An absolute scumbag dog who has been raping women since he was in his teens, and quite likely well before.
This is his form:
Lovely record isn’t it?
At 17 he rapes a backpacker who was walking to the toilet in a shared block in a caravan park.
At 18 he grabs a young woman who was waiting for a train on a western Brisbane station platform, assaults her but she fights him off and escapes. All rapists are weak pricks Kevvie down at the Bunger reckons, and this proves him right.
A couple of weeks later Burley goes to the next station up the line, grabs an innocent teenage girl, subjects her to unmentionable horrors for the next 3/4 of an hour, and ruins her life.
Then a few weeks after that he goes back to the train station and, using a weapon, forces a mother of young kids into bush land where he brutally rapes her, threatening to rape and kill her children if she tells.
Despite the horror that Burley has just subjected her to, the woman retains enough of her former senses to realise that the devil’s spawn cannot assault or murder children if he is behind bars, and so she tells.
Burley is arrested, tried and of course convicted, and it’s goodnight nurse and that’s all she wrote for the animal for the next 16 years, increased to 20 after an appeal by the Attorney General.
Or it would have been anyway, if we actually had truth in sentencing, but after just 2/3rd’s of his sentence the psychopath is released.
Within a year he is arrested again for a raft of drug, theft and other charges, including intimidation witnesses and, most concernedly when it comes to a brutal sex offender, for possessing stolen women’s underwear. He cops an extra 15 months on top of his original 20 year sentence, and is supposed to be banged up until 2020.
Of course he isn’t, because when it comes to sex-offenders our penal system is piss-weak, and so in February 2015 he is once more released back into civil society so that he can rape some more women.
And form guides never lying, so it appears that he does, for this modern-day exemplar of the supposed reformed sexual psychopath – who has completed more than 120 courses during his time behind bars – is this week back in his familiar seat in the District Court dock, charged with fresh rape offences that he is undoubtedly guilty of committing.
Thanks to the beauty of our criminal ‘justice’ system you won’t be told any of this by the mainstream media except for the fact that Burley’s presently on trial, but the events above as I present them are the facts, and it’s a damning indictment upon our present legislative and judicial approach to the sentencing of inhuman sex criminals.
I guess it’s just lucky that Burley didn’t rape and almost kill a kid like that c*nt Cowan did in Darwin, because then he would have served just 3 1/2 years for his vicious crimes, rather than the 13 out of a 20 sentence that he did, the welfare of kids clearly being less valued by the courts than that of adults, ‘they’ll get over it’ being the seeming attitude of the bench-jockeys who have never been subjected to ‘it’.
Imagine how many more women would have been attacked, raped and quite possibly murdered if Burley had copped a mere kiddy fiddler’s sentence.
We should be thanking the authorities for keeping the small-cocked c*nt cooped up for so long, not condemning them for letting him out early on parole. Damn straight we should.